An update from GitHub: https://github.com/orgs/community/discussions/159123#discussioncomment-13148279
The rates are here: https://docs.github.com/en/rest/using-the-rest-api/rate-limits-for-the-rest-api?apiVersion=2022-11-28
- 60 req/hour for unauthenticated users
- 5000 req/hour for authenticated - personal
- 15000 req/hour for authenticated - enterprise org
https://www.gemini.com/es-LA/cryptopedia/what-is-radicle-crypto-github-alternative-rad-token
Do tou think they made a crypto scam with almost the same name just for funsies?
Better by their own words: https://docs.radworks.org/community/rad-token
The Gemini.com article looks like AI slop to me, honestly.
DAGs are a distributed ledger? Wat?
Also if you actually looked at the code of radicle, you wouldn’t find rad tokens, erc-20, or whatever else. If you further looked at the protocols you’d see that they aren’t using a blockchain. Repository ownership is not handled by smart contracts either - it’s all public key cryptography, which (again) is not crypto in the sense you’re talking about.
To be fair, the article is old and describing radicle version 2. You can find the code here, but I can’t find ERC tokens or anything like that in there, which further makes me think the authors of the article are very confused, AI, or misrepresenting the project on purpose. Of course, it’s possible that all references to crypto were removed from the archive, but it would be good to provide a link to that if you found it.
This I didn’t know of. But I’m curious how that will be done. It is not proof of crypto being within the radicle protocol or codebase (because it isn’t, I looked - maybe I missed it, but I’d like proof thereof). It might be put in there in the future but I’m pretty sure they know it would piss off people to do that.
My guess is that theyll do it like IPFS, which I don’t think has crypto with the protocol but has filecoin on top to reward people who pin things in IPFS. But IPFS users can completely ignore filecoin and aren’t required to use it.
Anti Commercial-AI license
As I said it’s not that crypto is inside de protocol. Is that the parent company (which is just the same people) made a crypto to be used with the protocol. On top of it. Which takes trust away from me. If they want donations ask for donations. If they want to provide a paid service then do a paid service.
But having a crypto they want to move around feels dishonest to me. People will be pumping the crypto thinking they are making an investment, thinking they are going to earn money or participate in some sort of circular economy but they will loose it, all. And the owners will get all their fiat money as soon as they can. I have seen it happen countless times.
If they do that from the beginning, what will they be doing in the future if the project take off? I’d better not find out.
OK I understand your concerns better. Thank you for explaining.
I am less concerned and don’t have such a negative relationship with crypto. As long as it’s not the selling point of something and decoupled from the actual project or product, that’s fine to me. That others don’t feel the same way is understandable.
For me, radicle is the fastest way to get off of github. All my projects are now there and anybody can contribute without signing up to yet another website i.e they don’t need to have a login for each individual forgejo or gitlab instance. One radicle identity is all you need to contribute to a radicle project on any seed node.
If (when?) forgejo finally gets federation, I’d be more open to using it, but at the moment, it barely provides an advantage over radicle.
Anti Commercial-AI license